Reich & Binstock, LLP v. Robert Scates, Individually and D/B/A Scates Engineering Consultants

Court of Appeals of Texas

Reich & Binstock, LLP v. Robert Scates, Individually and D/B/A Scates Engineering Consultants

DecidedJanuary 31, 2014

Docket14-13-00906-CV

StatusPublished

This text of Reich & Binstock, LLP v. Robert Scates, Individually and D/B/A Scates Engineering Consultants (Reich & Binstock, LLP v. Robert Scates, Individually and D/B/A Scates Engineering Consultants) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Reich & Binstock, LLP v. Robert Scates, Individually and D/B/A Scates Engineering Consultants, (Tex. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Order filed, January 31, 2014.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals ____________

NO. 14-13-00906-CV ____________

REICH & BINSTOCK, LLP, Appellant

V.

ROBERT SCATES, INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A SCATES ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 55th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2010-46208

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due October 23, 2013. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1. On October 28, 2013 Gina Wilburn notified the court that no payment arrangements had been made for the record. On November 13, 2013, the appellant provided proof of payment for the reporter’s record. On November 20, 2013 Gina Wilburn filed a motion for extension of time to file the record which was GRANTED to January 25, 2014. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Gina Wilburn, the official court reporter, to file the record in this appeal within 30 days of the date of this order. No further extension will be entertained absent exceptional circumstances. The trial and appellate courts are jointly responsible for ensuring that the appellate record is timely filed. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.3(c). If Gina Wilburn does not timely file the record as ordered, we will issue an order directing the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine the reason for the failure to file the record.

PER CURIAM

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order filed, January 31, 2014.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals ____________

NO. 14-13-00906-CV ____________

REICH & BINSTOCK, LLP, Appellant

V.

ROBERT SCATES, INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A SCATES ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 55th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2010-46208

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due October 23, 2013. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1. On October 28, 2013 Gina Wilburn notified the court that no payment arrangements had been made for the record. On November 13, 2013, the appellant provided proof of payment for the reporter’s record. On November 20, 2013 Gina Wilburn filed a motion for extension of time to file the record which was GRANTED to January 25, 2014. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Gina Wilburn, the official court reporter, to file the record in this appeal within 30 days of the date of this order. No further extension will be entertained absent exceptional circumstances. The trial and appellate courts are jointly responsible for ensuring that the appellate record is timely filed. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.3(c). If Gina Wilburn does not timely file the record as ordered, we will issue an order directing the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine the reason for the failure to file the record.

PER CURIAM

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Reich & Binstock, LLP v. Robert Scates, Individually and D/B/A Scates Engineering Consultants, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reich-binstock-llp-v-robert-scates-individually-an-texapp-2014.